Page 173 - IJB-10-5
P. 173

International Journal of Bioprinting                               Nozzle optimization for multi-ink bioprinting




            printing progress and automatically adjusts parameters   Author contributions
            could be invaluable for achieving higher resolution in   Conceptualization: Mitsuyuki Hidaka, Shinji Sakai
            3D bioprinting. This integrated approach, combining   Formal analysis:  Mitsuyuki Hidaka
            advanced nozzle design, precise bioink control, and   Investigation: Mitsuyuki Hidaka
            feedback systems, represents a significant step forward in   Methodology: Mitsuyuki Hidaka
            producing complex, high-resolution 3D structures suitable   Project administration: Shinji Sakai
            for tissue engineering and other advanced applications. 48  Supervision: Shinji Sakai
                                                               Visualization: Mitsuyuki Hidaka, Masaru Kojima
            5. Conclusion                                      Writing–original draft: Mitsuyuki Hidaka
            Switching efficiency (Se) was used to evaluate the influence   Writing–review & editing: All authors
            of the nozzle shape and ink viscosity on liquid behavior
            within a nozzle, aiming to achieve high switching efficiency   Ethics approval and consent to participate
            in  multi-ink  printing  with  a  single  nozzle.  Numerical   Not applicable.
            simulations were conducted to analyze the fluid dynamics
            inside the nozzle, and these results were then validated   Consent for publication
            against experimental findings. The correlation between the
            simulation and experimental outcomes highlighted the use   Not applicable.
            of Se in assessing the ink behavior within a single nozzle.   Availability of data
            Our study confirmed that both the nozzle design and ink
            viscosity are critical factors in efficiently switching between   Data  is  available  from  the  corresponding  author  upon
            different viscous inks. Based on these findings, innovative   reasonable request.
            single nozzle designs were developed through numerical
            simulation.  Then, these newly  designed nozzles  were   References
            utilized to print line structures with bioinks of varying
            viscosities.  The nozzles  designed through this  process   1.   Oropallo W, Piegl LA. Ten challenges in 3D printing. Eng
                                                                  Comput. 2016;32(1):135-148.
            demonstrated a reduced transition length compared      doi: 10.1007/s00366-015-0407-0.
            with traditional symmetrical and T-junction nozzles,
            highlighting their improved performance. To the best of   2.   Sun J, Zhou W, Huang D, Fuh JYH, Hong GS. An overview of
            our knowledge, this study is the first to employ numerical   3D printing technologies for food fabrication. Food Bioproc
                                                                  Tech. 2015;8(8):1605-1615.
            simulation to enhance the design of a single nozzle for      doi: 10.1007/s11947-015-1528-6.
            bioprinting applications. The successful application of
            Se as a metric and the subsequent redesign of the nozzle   3.   Duan  B.  State-of-the-art  review  of  3D  bioprinting  for
            have  potential  implications  for  advancing  the  field  of   cardiovascular tissue engineering.  Ann Biomed Eng.
                                                                  2017;45(1): 195-209.
            bioprinting, offering more precise and efficient methods      doi: 10.1007/s10439-016-1607-5
            for creating complex tissue structures.
                                                               4.   Ng WL, Chua CK, Shen YF. Print me an organ! Why we are
            Acknowledgments                                       not there yet. Prog Polym Sci. 2019;97:101145.
                                                                  doi: 10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2019.101145
            None.                                              5.   Singh S, Choudhury D, Yu F, Mironov V, Naing MW. In situ
                                                                  bioprinting – bioprinting from benchside to bedside? Acta
            Funding                                               Biomater. 2020;101:14-25.
            This work was supported by the following sources:      doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2019.08.045
            JST SPRING (Grant Number JPMJSP2138) and JSPS      6.   Vithani K, Goyanes A, Jannin V, Basit AW, Gaisford S,
            KAKENHI (Grant Number 24KJ1594).                      Boyd BJ. An overview of 3D printing technologies for soft
                                                                  materials and potential opportunities for lipid-based drug
            Conflict of interest                                  delivery systems. Pharm Res. 2019;36(1):4.
                                                                  doi: 10.1007/s11095-018-2531-1
            Shinji Sakai serves as the Editorial Board Member of the   7.   Ramesh S, Harrysson OLA, Rao PK, et al.  Extrusion
            journal, but did not in any way involve in the editorial and   bioprinting: recent progress, challenges, and future
            peer-review process conducted for this paper, directly or   opportunities. Bioprinting. 2021;21:e00116.
            indirectly. Other authors declare no conflicts of interest.     doi: 10.1016/j.bprint.2020.e00116



            Volume 10 Issue 5 (2024)                       165                                doi: 10.36922/ijb.4091
   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178